Marriage

[Josiah]

It seems that a hot button topic is same sex marriage. I am curuious how others view this. My personal view is that it between a man and a woman and that same sex is sinful and against Gods word

I embrace the separation of church and state (Right Hand of God, Left Hand of God). I think the fundamental problem here is that (for understandable historic reasons) the church and families gave up the institution of marriage and the secular, civil goverment took it over. This ANCIENT, UNIVERSAL HUMAN institution - that for tens of thousands of years was "governed" by FAMILIES and (usually) by RELIGION has been taken over by the secular, civil government. We reap what we sow....

IMO, the US Government and the State of California has NO BUSINESS in marriage. I think it DOES have "business" in economic matters, legal matters, even perhaps in child custody matters... and so I'm not opposed to the secular government governing contracts and corporations... and so I'm not opposed to "civil unions" which are simply CIVIL, SECULAR personal corporations. A government may, IMO, determine who may and may not form such a CIVIL, SECULAR corporation what what "rights" and responsibilities IT - the secular, civil authority - grants to such as CIVIL rights. If the State of California wants to permit a 92 year old lady and her 43 Pug dogs to be a civil corporation with all the rights and responsibilites (and tax advantages) usually granted to "marriage", I'm 100% okay with that. Civil, secular GOVERNMENT can govern CIVIL contracts. But where I disagree is that such is THEREFORE, 'marriage'. No, it is not.

For tens of thousands of years..... in virtually all soceities and religions.... MARRIAGE has been a union established by Tradition, families and religion (a Sacrament in most of Christianity; for about 1.5 billion people on the planet right now). And while a case (however weak) can be made that "MARRIAGE" is not always ONE man and ONE woman, there is nothing for the idea of marriage being same-sex or between an old lady and her pugs, or between all the members of a basketball team or all US Citizens or any other SILLY, entirely UNhistorical "definition" people may want to change things too.

MY view: Government - GET OUT OF MARRIAGE!!!!! Marriage is bigger and much older than the Supreme Court of the USA. The civil STATE should stick to STATE issues and not get into granting Sacraments, surplanting families, becoming religion.



- Josiah

 

[psalms 91]

I agree and if that is the case then civil unions should be performed by civil authorities and not pastors. Nor should they ever be forced to perform same sex marriages.

 

[tango]

I agree and if that is the case then civil unions should be performed by civil authorities and not pastors. Nor should they ever be forced to perform same sex marriages.

One problem is that in many ways the church has danced with the devil in that for so many years it was the sole administrator of what had become a state-sanctioned secular union. As the saying goes, if you dine with the devil you'd best use a long spoon. In many ways it would be better if churches merely withdrew from the marriage business altogether.

People who wanted to be legally married could go to the register office to get their piece of paper while people who wanted their relationship blessed could go to the religious establishment of their choice. If a religious establishment decided it didn't want to offer blessings to particular groups of people they could quite reasonably restrict it such that it was only available to members of good standing. The chances are a gay couple who just wanted to cause trouble wouldn't go to the trouble of attending church every Sunday for a year, sitting through membership classes and being subject to a vote of existing members as to whether they could join. The gay couple who genuinely wanted to be part of the church community would probably already be members of a church that was willing to accept their relationship.

 

[psalms 91]

I agree that churchs for to long have accepted from the government and now the price is coming due. I also am pretty sure that there are gay couples out there who want nothing more than to create controversy

 

[80sChild]

I believe it's between a man and a woman. This is from my church, it was written in 1995.

THE FAMILY
A PROCLAMATION TO THE WORLD
The First Presidency and Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

WE, THE FIRST PRESIDENCY and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.

ALL HUMAN BEINGS—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.

IN THE PREMORTAL REALM, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshipped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally.

THE FIRST COMMANDMENT that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.

WE DECLARE the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God’s eternal plan.

HUSBAND AND WIFE have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. “Children are an heritage of the Lord” (Psalm 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, and to teach them to love and serve one another, observe the commandments of God, and be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers—will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.

THE FAMILY is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities. By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.

WE WARN that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.

WE CALL UPON responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.

This proclamation was read by President Gordon B. Hinckley.


80'sChild

 

[Josiah]

I embrace the separation of church and state (Right Hand of God, Left Hand of God). I think the fundamental problem here is that (for understandable historic reasons) the church and families gave up the institution of marriage and the secular, civil goverment took it over. This ANCIENT, UNIVERSAL HUMAN institution - that for tens of thousands of years was "governed" by FAMILIES and (usually) by RELIGION has been taken over by the secular, civil government. We reap what we sow....

IMO, the US Government and the State of California has NO BUSINESS in marriage. I think it DOES have "business" in economic matters, legal matters, even perhaps in child custody matters... and so I'm not opposed to the secular government governing contracts and corporations... and so I'm not opposed to "civil unions" which are simply CIVIL, SECULAR personal corporations. A government may, IMO, determine who may and may not form such a CIVIL, SECULAR corporation what what "rights" and responsibilities IT - the secular, civil authority - grants to such as CIVIL rights. If the State of California wants to permit a 92 year old lady and her 43 Pug dogs to be a civil corporation with all the rights and responsibilites (and tax advantages) usually granted to "marriage", I'm 100% okay with that. Civil, secular GOVERNMENT can govern CIVIL contracts. But where I disagree is that such is THEREFORE, 'marriage'. No, it is not.

For tens of thousands of years..... in virtually all soceities and religions.... MARRIAGE has been a union established by Tradition, families and religion (a Sacrament in most of Christianity; for about 1.5 billion people on the planet right now). And while a case (however weak) can be made that "MARRIAGE" is not always ONE man and ONE woman, there is nothing for the idea of marriage being same-sex or between an old lady and her pugs, or between all the members of a basketball team or all US Citizens or any other SILLY, entirely UNhistorical "definition" people may want to change things too.

MY view: Government - GET OUT OF MARRIAGE!!!!! Marriage is bigger and much older than the Supreme Court of the USA. The civil STATE should stick to STATE issues and not get into granting Sacraments, surplanting families, becoming religion.




.

I agree and if that is the case then civil unions should be performed by civil authorities and not pastors. Nor should they ever be forced to perform same sex marriages.

I agree. The SECULAR GOVERNMENT has authority over secular, civil contracts - and so it would be the one to acknowledge a civil/personal corporation (a "civil union") and it would be the one to acknowledge what rights, privileges, authorities, responsibilities, etc. would be associated with such. If the People's Republic of California wants to say that 3 old ladies and 8 Pug dogs may form a civil union (with tax emempt status and hospital visitation rights) - fine with me, that IS the authority of the government. And NOT the authority of the church.

But that SECULAR, CIVIL GOVERNMENT needs to get out of marriages. Marriage is MUCH, MUCH older and broader than the People's Republic of California or one man on the Supreme Court of the USA.... it is a PERSONAL and FAMILIAR and RELIGIOUS institution far, far beyond the authority of a state or man on a court. For 1.5 billion people on the planet, it is a HOLY SACRAMENT of the Church. Yes, I think CHURCHES should do this. Now, the government may or may not choose to recongize such in some CIVIL legal/economic manner - that's up to the thousands of legal jurisdictions on our planet.

The church stood by and gladly handed over marriage to the SECULAR government - ignoring the separation of church and state. We're now reaping the consequences. We need to take it back. And the government needs to get out of Sacraments. We have these social liberals SCREAMING constantly "Separation of church and state!" yet none insists on intermingling them more.... especially when it comes to marriage, especially when it seems like a way to triumph over the church, to become the church, to silence the church.... the antithesis of separation of church and state.

STATE: Issue personal corporate status ("civil union") - ANYWAY it wants, to whomever it wants.
CHURCH/FAMILY: Marry folks.



MY half cent.



- Josiah

 

[tango]

I agree. The SECULAR GOVERNMENT has authority over secular, civil contracts - and so it would be the one to acknowledge a civil/personal corporation (a "civil union") and it would be the one to acknowledge what rights, privileges, authorities, responsibilities, etc. would be associated with such. If the People's Republic of California wants to say that 3 old ladies and 8 Pug dogs may form a civil union (with tax emempt status and hospital visitation rights) - fine with me, that IS the authority of the government. And NOT the authority of the church.

But that SECULAR, CIVIL GOVERNMENT needs to get out of marriages. Marriage is MUCH, MUCH older and broader than the People's Republic of California or one man on the Supreme Court of the USA.... it is a PERSONAL and FAMILIAR and RELIGIOUS institution far, far beyond the authority of a state or man on a court. For 1.5 billion people on the planet, it is a HOLY SACRAMENT of the Church. Yes, I think CHURCHES should do this. Now, the government may or may not choose to recongize such in some CIVIL legal/economic manner - that's up to the thousands of legal jurisdictions on our planet.

The church stood by and gladly handed over marriage to the SECULAR government - ignoring the separation of church and state. We're now reaping the consequences. We need to take it back. And the government needs to get out of Sacraments. We have these social liberals SCREAMING constantly "Separation of church and state!" yet none insists on intermingling them more.... especially when it comes to marriage, especially when it seems like a way to triumph over the church, to become the church, to silence the church.... the antithesis of separation of church and state.

STATE: Issue personal corporate status ("civil union") - ANYWAY it wants, to whomever it wants.
CHURCH/FAMILY: Marry folks.



MY half cent.



- Josiah

The trouble comes when the church wants it both ways.

If the church wants the government to get out of marriage then the church also needs to separate itself from the secular institution currently called marriage and restructure what it calls a marriage ceremony to reflect faith issues, accepting it may or may not be regarded as legally valid by the government.

The church can't get into bed with the government to get a monopoly over something and then complain when the government decides it wants to share. Fundamentally if the church is offering a service that the state sanctions and calls "marriage" then it must offer it under the terms of the state's contract or not stop offering it. If it wants to create its own offering it must accept that the state has the final say over whether or not the church's version is legally valid or not.

It's easy to criticise those who would use the instruments of state to control the church but maybe we should be looking closer to home, at the church that has gotten into bed with the state and now doesn't like the consequences.